The Anti-Slavery Examiner Volume IV Part 9

Again, if it be said, that those clauses, being immoral, are null and void--we reply, it is true they are not to be observed; but it is also true that they are portions of an instrument, the support of which, AS A WHOLE, is required by oath or affirmation; and, therefore, _because they are immoral_, and BECAUSE OF THIS OBLIGATION TO ENFORCE IMMORALITY, no one can innocently swear to support the Const.i.tution.

Again, if it be objected, that the Const.i.tution was formed by the people of the United States, in order to establish justice, to promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to themselves and their posterity: and therefore, it is to be so construed as to harmonize with these objects; we reply, again, that its language is _not to be interpreted in a sense which neither of the contracting parties understood_, and which would frustrate every design of their alliance--to wit, _union at the expense of the colored population of the country_. Moreover, nothing is more certain than that the preamble alluded to never included, in the minds of those who framed it, _those who were then pining in bondage_--for, in that case, a general emanc.i.p.ation of the slaves would have instantly been proclaimed throughout the United States. The words, "secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity," a.s.suredly meant only the white population. "To promote the general welfare," referred to their own welfare exclusively. "To establish justice," was understood to be for their sole benefit as slaveholders, and the guilty abettors of slavery. This is demonstrated by other parts of the same instrument, and by their own practice under it.

We would not detract aught from what is justly their due; but it is as reprehensible to give them credit for _what they did not possess_, as it is to rob them of what is theirs. It is absurd, it is false, it is an insult to the common sense of mankind, to pretend that the Const.i.tution was intended to embrace the entire population of the country under its sheltering wings; or that the parties to it were actuated by a sense of justice and the spirit of impartial liberty; or that it needs no alteration, but only a new interpretation, to make it harmonize with the object aimed at by its adoption. As truly might it be argued, that because it is a.s.serted in the Declaration of Independence, that all men are created equal, and endowed with an inalienable right to liberty, therefore none of its signers were slaveholders, and since its adoption, slavery has been banished from the American soil! The truth is, our fathers were intent on securing liberty _to themselves_, without being very scrupulous as to the means they used to accomplish their purpose. They were not actuated by the spirit of universal philanthropy; and though _in words_ they recognized occasionally the brotherhood of the human race, _in practice_ they continually denied it. They did not blush to enslave a portion of their fellow-men, and to buy and sell them as cattle in the market, while they were fighting against the oppression of the mother country, and boasting of their regard for the rights of man.

Why, then, concede to them virtues which they did not posses.

_Why cling to the falsehood, that they were not respecters of persons in the formation of the government_?

Alas! that they had no more fear of G.o.d, no more regard for man, in their hearts! "The iniquity of the house of Israel and Judah [the North and South] is exceeding great, and the land is full of blood, and the city full of perverseness; for they say, the Lord hath forsaken the earth, and the Lord seeth not."

We proceed to a critical examination of the American Const.i.tution, in its relations to slavery.

In ARTICLE 1, Section 9, it is declared--"the migration or importation of such persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress, prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight; but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person."

In this Section, it will be perceived, the phraseology is so guarded as not to imply, _ex necessitate_, any criminal intent or inhuman arrangement; and yet no one has ever had the hardihood or folly to deny, that it was clearly understood by the contracting parties, to mean that there should be no interference with the African slave trade, on the part of the general government, until the year 1808.

For twenty years after the adoption of the Const.i.tution, the citizens of the United States were to be encouraged and protected in the prosecution of that infernal traffic--in sacking and burning the hamlets of Africa--in slaughtering mult.i.tudes of the inoffensive natives on the soil, kidnapping and enslaving a still greater proportion, crowding them to suffocation in the holds of the slave ships, populating the Atlantic with their dead bodies, and subjecting the wretched survivors to all the horrors of unmitigated bondage! This awful covenant was strictly fulfilled; and though, since its termination, Congress has declared the foreign slave traffic to be piracy, yet all Christendom knows that the American flag, instead of being the terror of the African slavers, has given them the most ample protection.

The manner in which the 9th Section was agreed to, by the national convention that formed the const.i.tution, is thus frankly avowed by the Hon. Luther Martin,[91] who was a prominent member of that body:

"The Eastern States, notwithstanding their aversion of slavery, (!) _were very willing to indulge the Southern States_ at least with a temporary liberty to prosecute the slave trade, provided the Southern States would, in the return, _gratify_ them by laying no restriction on navigation acts; and, after a very little time, the committee, by a great majority, agreed on a report, _by which the general government was to be prohibited from preventing the importation of slaves_ for a limited time; and the restrictive clause relative to navigation acts was to be omitted."

Behold the iniquity of this agreement! How sordid were the motives which led to it! what a profligate disregard of justice and humanity, on the part of those who had solemnly declared the inalienable right of all men to be free and equal, to be a self-evident truth!

It is due to the national convention to say, that this section was not adopted "without considerable opposition." Alluding to it, Mr. Martin observes--

[Footnote 91: Speech before the Legislature of Maryland in 1787.]

"It was said we had just a.s.sumed a place among the independent nations in consequence of our opposition to the attempts of Great Britain to _enslave us_; that this opposition was grounded upon the preservation of those rights to which G.o.d and nature has ent.i.tled us, not in _particular_, but in _common with all the rest of mankind_; that we had appealed to the Supreme Being for his a.s.sistance, as the G.o.d of freedom, who could not but approve our efforts to preserve the rights which he had thus imparted to his creatures; that now, when we had scarcely risen from our knees, from supplicating his mercy and protection in forming our government over a free people, a government formed pretendedly on the principles of liberty, and for its preservation,--in that government to have a provision, not only of putting out of its power to restrain and prevent the slave trade, even encouraging that most infamous traffic, by giving the States the power and influence in the Union in proportion as they cruelly and wantonly sported with the rights of their fellow-creatures, ought to be considered as a solemn mockery of, and insult to, that G.o.d whose protection we had thus implored, and could not fail to hold us up in detestation, and render us contemptible to every true friend of liberty in the world. It was said that national crimes can only be, and frequently are, punished in this world by _national punishments_, and that the continuance of the slave trade, and thus giving it a national character, sanction, and encouragement, ought to be considered as justly exposing us to the displeasure and vengeance of him who is equally the Lord of all, and who views with equal eye the poor _African slave_ and his _American master_![92]

[Footnote 92: How terribly and justly has this guilty nation been scourged, since these words were spoken, on account of slavery and the slave trade! Secret Proceedings, p. 64.]

"It was urged that, by this system, we were giving the general government full and absolute power to regulate commerce, under which general power it would have a right to restrain, or totally prohibit, the slave trade: it must, therefore, appear to the world absurd and disgraceful to the last degree that we should except from the exercise of that power the only branch of commerce which is unjustifiable in its nature, and contrary to the rights of mankind.

That, on the contrary, we ought to prohibit expressly, in our Const.i.tution, the further importation of slaves, and to authorize the general government, from time to time, to make such regulations as should be thought most advantageous for the gradual abolition of slavery, and the emanc.i.p.ation of the slaves already in the States.

That slavery is inconsistent with the genius of republicanism, and has a tendency to destroy those principles on which it is supported, as it lessens the sense of the equal rights of mankind, and habituates to tyranny and oppression. It was further urged that, by this system of government, every State is to be protected both from foreign invasion and from domestic insurrections; and, from this consideration, it was of the utmost importance it should have the power to restrain the importation of slaves, since in proportion as the number of slaves increased in any State, in the same proportion is the State weakened and exposed to foreign invasion and domestic insurrection: and by so much less will it be able to protect itself against either, and therefore by so much, want aid from, and be a burden to, the Union.

"It was further said, that, in this system, as we were giving the general government power, under the idea of national character, or national interest, to regulate even our weights and measures, and have prohibited all possibility of emitting paper money, and pa.s.sing insolvent laws, &c., it must appear still more extraordinary that we prohibited the government from interfering with the slave trade, than which nothing could more effect our national honor and interest.

"These reasons influenced me, both in the committee and in the convention, most decidedly to oppose and vote against the clause, as it now makes part of the system."[93]

[Footnote 93: Secret Proceedings, p. 64.]

Happy had it been for this nation, had these solemn considerations been heeded by the framers of the Const.i.tution! But for the sake of securing some local advantages, they choose to do evil that good may come, and to make the end sanctify the means. They were willing to enslave others, that they might secure their own freedom. They did this deed deliberately, with their eyes open, with all the facts and consequences arising therefrom before them, in violation of all their heaven-attested declarations, and in atheistical distrust of the overruling power of G.o.d. "The Eastern States were very willing to _indulge_ the Southern States" in the unrestricted prosecution of their piratical traffic, provided in return they could be _gratified_ by no restriction being laid on navigation acts!!--Had there been no other provision of the Const.i.tution justly liable to objection, this one alone rendered the support of that instrument incompatible with the duties which men owe to their Creator, and to each other. It was the poisonous infusion in the cup, which, though const.i.tuting but a very slight portion of its contents, perilled the life of every one who partook of it.

If it be asked to what purpose are these animadversions, since the clause alluded to has long since expired by its own limitation--we answer, that, if at any time the foreign slave trade could be _const.i.tutionally_ prosecuted, it may yet be renewed, under the Const.i.tution, at the pleasure of Congress, whose prohibitory statute is liable to be reversed at any moment, in the frenzy of Southern opposition to emanc.i.p.ation. It is ignorantly supposed that the bargain was, that the traffic _should cease_ in 1808; but the only thing secured by it was, the _right_ of Congress (not any obligation) to prohibit it at that period. If, therefore, Congress had not chosen to exercise that right, _the traffic might have been prolonged indefinitely, under the Const.i.tution_. The right to destroy any particular branch of commerce, implies the right to re-establish it. True, there is no probability that the African slave trade will ever again be legalized by the national government; but no credit is due the framers of the Const.i.tution on this ground; for, while they threw around it all the sanction and protection of the national character and power for twenty years, _they set no bounds to its continuance by any positive const.i.tutional prohibition_.

Again, the adoption of such a clause, and the faithful execution of it, prove what was meant by the words of the preamble--"to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity"--namely, that the parties to the Const.i.tution regarded only their own rights and interests, and never intended that its language should be so interpreted as to interfere with slavery, or to make it unlawful for one portion of the people to enslave another, _without an express alteration in that instrument, in the manner therein set forth_. While, therefore, the Const.i.tution remains as it was originally adopted, they who swear to support it are bound to comply with all its provisions, as a matter of allegiance. For it avails nothing to say, that some of those provisions are at war with the law of G.o.d and the rights of man, and therefore are not obligatory. Whatever may be their character, they are _const.i.tutionally_ obligatory; and whoever feels that he cannot execute them, or swear to execute them, without committing sin, has no other choice left than to withdraw from the government, or to violate his conscience by taking on his lips an impious promise. The object of the Const.i.tution is not to define _what is the law of G.o.d_, but WHAT IS THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE--which will is not to be frustrated by an ingenious moral interpretation, by those whom they have elected to serve them.

ARTICLE 1, Sect. 2, provides--"Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several States, which may be included within this Union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, _three-fifths of all other persons_."

Here, as in the clause we have already examined, veiled beneath a form of words as deceitful as it is unmeaning in a truly democratic government, is a provision for the safety, perpetuity and augmentation of the slaveholding power--a provision scarcely less atrocious than that which related to the African slave trade, and almost as afflictive in its operation--a provision still in force, with no possibility of its alteration, so long as a majority of the slave States choose to maintain their slave system--a provision which, at the present time, enables the South to have twenty-five additional representatives in Congress on the score of _property_, while the North is not allowed to have one--a provision which concedes to the oppressed three-fifths of the political power which is granted to all others, aid then puts this power into the hands of their oppressors, to be wielded by them for the more perfect security of their tyrannous authority, and the complete subjugation of the non-slaveholding States.

Referring to this atrocious bargain, ALEXANDER HAMILTON remarked in the New York Convention--

"The first thing objected to, is that clause which allows a representation for three-fifths of the negroes. Much has been said of the impropriety of representing men who have no will of their own: whether this is _reasoning_ or _declamation_, (!!) I will not presume to say. It is the _unfortunate_ situation of the Southern States to have a great part of their population, as well as _property_, in blacks. The regulation complained of was one result of _the spirit of accommodation_ which governed the Convention; and without this _indulgence_, NO UNION COULD POSSIBLY HAVE BEEN FORMED.

But, sir, considering some _peculiar advantages_ which we derive from them it is entirely JUST that they should be _gratified_--The Southern States possess certain staples,--tobacco, rice, indigo, &c.--which must be _capital_ objects in treaties of commerce with foreign nations; and the advantage which they necessarily procure in these treaties will be felt throughout the United States."

If such was the patriotism, such the love of liberty, such the morality of ALEXANDER HAMILTON, what can be said of the character of those who were far less conspicuous than himself in securing American independence, and in framing the American Const.i.tution?

Listen, now, to the opinions of JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, respecting the const.i.tutional clause now under consideration:--

"'In outward show, it is a representation of persons in bondage; in fact, it is a representation of their masters,--the oppressor representing the oppressed.'--'Is it in the compa.s.s of human imagination to devise a more perfect exemplification of the art of committing the lamb to the tender custody of the wolf?'--'The representative is thus const.i.tuted, not the friend, agent and trustee of the person whom he represents, but the most inveterate of his foes.'--'It was _one_ of the curses from that Pandora's box, adjusted at the time, as usual, by a _compromise_, the whole advantage of which inured to the benefit of the South, and to aggravate the burdens of the North.'--'If there be a parallel to it in human history, it can only be that of the Roman Emperors, who, from the days when Julius Caesar subst.i.tuted a military despotism in the place of a republic, among the offices which they always concentrated upon themselves, was that of tribune of the people. A Roman Emperor tribune of the people, is an exact parallel to that feature in the Const.i.tution of the United States which makes the master the representative of his slave.'--'The Const.i.tution of the United States expressly prescribes that no t.i.tle of n.o.bility shall be granted by the United States. The spirit of this interdict is not a rooted antipathy to the grant of mere powerless empty _t.i.tles_, but to t.i.tles of _n.o.bility_; to the inst.i.tution of privileged orders of men. But what order of men under the most absolute of monarchies, or the most aristocratic of republics, was ever invested with such an odious and unjust privilege as that of the separate and exclusive representation of less than half a million owners of slaves, in the Hall of this House, in the Chair of the Senate, and in the Presidential mansion?'--'This investment of power in the owners of one species of property concentrated in the highest authorities of the nation, and disseminated through thirteen of the twenty-six States of the Union, const.i.tutes a privileged order of men in the community, more adverse to the rights of all, and more pernicious to the interests of the whole, than any order of n.o.bility ever known.

To call government thus const.i.tuted a democracy, is to insult the understanding of mankind. To call it an aristocracy, is to do injustice to that form of government. Aristocracy is the government of _the best_. Its standard qualification for accession to power _is merit_, ascertained by popular election recurring at short intervals of time. If even that government is p.r.o.ne to degenerate into tyranny, what must be the character of that form of polity in which the standard qualification for access to power is wealth in the possession of slaves? It is doubly tainted with the infection of riches and of slavery. _There is no name in the language of national jurisprudence that can define it_--no model in the records of ancient history, or in the political theories of Aristotle, with which it can be likened. It was introduced into the Const.i.tution of the United States by an equivocation--a representation of property under the name of persons. Little did the members of the Convention from the free States foresee what a sacrifice to Moloch was hidden under the mask of this concession.'--'The House of Representatives of the United States consists of 223 members--all, by the _letter_ of the Const.i.tution, representatives only of _persons_, as 135 of them really are; but the other 88, equally representing the _persons_ of their const.i.tuents, by whom they are elected, also represent, under the name of _other persons_, upwards of two and a half millions of _slaves_, held as the _property_ of less than half a million of the white const.i.tuents, and valued at twelve hundred millions of dollars. Each of these 88 members represents in fact the whole of that ma.s.s of a.s.sociated wealth, and the persons and exclusive interests of its owners; all thus knit together, like the members of a moneyed corporation, with a capital not of thirty-five or forty or fifty, but of twelve hundred millions of dollars, exhibiting the most extraordinary exemplification of the anti-republican tendencies of a.s.sociated wealth that the world ever saw,'--'Here is one cla.s.s of men, consisting of not more than one fortieth part of the whole people, not more than one-thirtieth part of the free population, exclusively devoted to their personal interests identified with their own as slaveholders of the same a.s.sociated wealth, and wielding by their votes, upon every question of government or of public policy, two-fifths of the whole power of the House. In the Senate of the Union, the proportion of the slaveholding power is yet greater. By the influence of slavery, in the States where the inst.i.tution is tolerated, over their elections, no other than a slaveholder can rise to the distinction of obtaining a seat in the Senate; and thus, of the 52 members of the federal Senate, 26 are owners of slaves, and as effectively representatives of that interest as the 88 members elected by them to the House.'--'By this process it is that all political power in the States is absorbed and engrossed by the owners of _slaves_, and the overruling policy of the States is shaped to strengthen and consolidate their domination.

The legislative, executive, and judicial authorities are all in their hands--the preservation, propagation, and perpetuation of the black code of slavery--every law of the legislature becomes a link in the chain of the slave; every executive act a rivet to his hapless fate; every judicial decision a perversion of the human intellect to the justification of _wrong_.--Its reciprocal operation upon the government of the nation is, to establish an artificial majority in the slave representation over that of the free people, in the American Congress, and thereby to make the PRESERVATION, PROPAGATION, AND PERPETUATION OF SLAVERY THE VITAL AND ANIMATING SPIRIT OF THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT.--The result is seen in the fact that, at this day, the President of the United States, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and five out of nine of the Judges of the Supreme Judicial Courts of the United States, are not only citizens of slaveholding States, but individual slaveholders themselves. So are, and constantly have been, with scarcely an exception, all the members of both Houses of Congress from the slaveholding States; and so are, in immensely disproportionate numbers, the commanding officers of the army and navy; the officers of the customs; the registers and receivers of the land offices, and the post-masters throughout the slaveholding States.--The Biennial Register indicates the birth-place of all the officers employed in the government of the Union. If it were required to designate the owners of this species of property among them, it would be little more than a catalogue of slaveholders.'"

It is confessed by Mr. Adams, alluding to the national convention that framed the Const.i.tution, that "the delegation from the free States, in their extreme anxiety to conciliate the ascendency of the Southern slaveholder, did listen to a _compromise between right and wrong_--_between freedom and slavery_; of the ultimate fruits of which they had no conception, but which already even now is urging the Union to its inevitable ruin and dissolution, by a civil, servile, foreign, and Indian war, all combined in one; a war, the essential issue of which will be between freedom and slavery, and in which the unhallowed standard of slavery will be the desecrated banner of the North American Union--that banner, first unfurled to the breeze, inscribed with the self-evident truths of the Declaration of Independence."

Hence, to swear to support the Const.i.tution of the United States, _as it is_, is to make "a compromise between right and wrong," and to wage war against human liberty. It is to recognize and honor as republican legislators, _incorrigible men-stealers_, MERCILESS TYRANTS, BLOOD THIRSTY a.s.sa.s.sINS, who legislate with deadly weapons about their persons, such as pistols, daggers, and bowie-knives, with which they threaten to murder any Northern senator or representative who shall dare to stain their _honor_, or interfere with their _rights_! They const.i.tute a banditti more fierce and cruel than any whose atrocities are recorded on the pages of history or romance. To mix with them on terms of social or religious fellowship, is to indicate a low state of virtue; but to think of administering a free government by their co-operation, is nothing short of insanity.

Article IV., Section 2, declares,--"No person held to service or labor in one State, _under the laws thereof_, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor; but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."

Here is a third clause, which, like the other two, makes no mention of slavery or slaves, in express terms; and yet, like them, was intelligently framed and mutually understood by the parties to the ratification, and intended both to protect the slave system and to restore runaway slaves. It alone makes slavery a national inst.i.tution, a national crime, and all the people who are not enslaved, the body-guard over those whose liberties have been cloven down. This agreement, too, has been fulfilled to the letter by the North.

Under the Mosaic dispensation it was imperatively commanded,--"Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the servant which is escaped from his master unto thee: he shall dwell with thee, even among you, in that place which he shall choose in one of thy gates, where it liketh him best: thou shalt not oppress him." The warning which the prophet Isaiah gave to oppressing Moab was of a similar kind: "Take counsel, execute judgment; make thy shadow as the night in the midst of the noon-day; hide the outcasts; bewray not him that wandereth. Let mine outcasts dwell with thee, Moab; be thou a covert to them from the face of the spoiler." The prophet Obadiah brings the following charge against treacherous Edom, which is precisely applicable to this guilty nation:--"For thy violence against thy brother Jacob, shame shall come over thee, and thou shalt be cut off for ever. In the day that thou stoodest on the other side, in the day that the strangers carried away captive his forces, and foreigners entered into his gates, and cast lots upon Jerusalem, _even thou wast as one of them_. But thou shouldst not have looked on the day of thy brother, in the day that he became a stranger; neither shouldst thou have rejoiced over the children of Judah, in the day of their destruction; neither shouldst thou have spoken proudly in the day of distress; neither shouldst thou have _stood in the cross-way, to cut off those of his that did escape_; neither shouldst thou have _delivered up those of his that did remain_, in the day of distress."

How exactly descriptive of this boasted republic is the impeachment of Edom by the same prophet! "The pride of thy heart hath deceived thee, thou whose habitation is high; that sayeth in thy heart, Who shall bring me down to the ground? Though thou exalt thyself as the eagle, and though thou set thy nest among the stars, thence will I bring thee down, saith the Lord." The emblem of American pride and power is the _eagle_, and on her banner she has mingled _stars_ with its _stripes_. Her vanity, her treachery, her oppression, her self-exaltation, and her defiance of the Almighty, far surpa.s.s the madness and wickedness of Edom. What shall be her punishment? Truly, it may be affirmed of the American people, (who live not under the Levitical but Christian code, and whose guilt, therefore, is the more awful, and their condemnation the greater,) in the language of another prophet--"They all lie in wait for blood; they hunt every man his brother with a net. That they may do evil with both hands earnestly, the prince asketh, and the judge asketh for a reward; and the great man, he uttereth his mischievous desire: _so they wrap it up_." Likewise of the colored inhabitants of this land it may be said, --"This is a people robbed and spoiled; they are all of them snared in holes, and they are hid in prison-houses; they are for a prey, and none delivereth; for a spoil, and none saith, Restore."

By this stipulation, the Northern States are made the hunting ground of slave-catchers, who may pursue their victims with blood-hounds, and capture them with impunity wherever they can lay their robber hands upon them. At least twelve or fifteen thousand runaway slaves are now in Canada, exiled from their native land, because they could not find, throughout its vast extent, a single road on which they could dwell in safety, _in consequence of this provision of the Const.i.tution_? How is it possible, then, for the advocates of liberty to support a government which gives over to destruction one-sixth part of the whole population?

It is denied by some at the present day, that the clause which has been cited, was intended to apply to runaway slaves. This indicates either ignorance, or folly, or something worse. JAMES MADISON as one of the framers of the Const.i.tution, is of some authority on this point. Alluding to that instrument, in the Virginia convention, he said:--

"Another clause _secures us that property which we now possess_. At present, if any slave elopes to those States where slaves are free, _he becomes emanc.i.p.ated by their laws_; for the laws of the States are _uncharitable_(!) to one another in this respect; but in this const.i.tution, 'No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered upon claim of the party to whom such service or labor away be due. THIS CLAUSE WAS EXPRESSLY INSERTED TO ENABLE THE OWNERS OF SLAVES TO RECLAIM THEM. _This is a better security than any that now exists_. No power is given to the general government to interfere with respect to the property in slaves now held by the States."

In the same convention, alluding to the same clause, GOV. RANDOLPH said:--

"Every one knows that slaves are held to service or labor. And, when authority is given to owners of slaves to _vindicate their property_, can it be supposed they can be deprived of it? If a citizen of this State, in consequence of this clause, can take his runaway slave in Maryland, can it be seriously thought that, after taking him and bringing him home, he could be made free?"

It is objected, that slaves are held as property, and therefore, as the clause refers to persons, it cannot mean slaves. But this is criticism against fact. Slaves are recognized not merely as property, but also as persons--as having a mixed character--as combining the human with the brutal. This is paradoxical, we admit; but slavery is a paradox--the American Const.i.tution is a paradox--the American Union is a paradox--the American Government is a paradox; and if any one of these is to be repudiated on that ground, they all are. That it is the duty of the friends of freedom to deny the binding authority of them all, and to secede from them all, we distinctly affirm. After the independence of this country had been achieved, the voice of G.o.d exhorted the people, saying, "Execute true judgment, and show mercy and compa.s.sion every man to his brother: and oppress not the widow, nor the fatherless, the stranger, nor the poor; and let none of you imagine evil against his brother in your heart. But they refused to hearken, and pulled away the shoulder, and stopped their ears, that they should not hear; yea, they made their hearts as an adamant stone." "Shall I not visit for these things? saith the Lord. Shall not my soul be avenged on such a nation as this?"

Whatever doubt may have rested on any honest mind, respecting the meaning of the clause in relation to persons held to service or labor, must have been removed by the unanimous decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, in the case of Prigg versus The State of Pennsylvania. By that decision, any Southern slave-catcher is empowered to seize and convey to the South, without hindrance or molestation on the part of the State, and without any legal process duly obtained and served, any person or persons, irrespective of caste or complexion, whom he may choose to claim as runaway slaves; and if, when thus surprised and attacked, or on their arrival South, they cannot prove by legal witnesses, that they are freemen, their doom is sealed! Hence the free colored population of the North are specially liable to become the victims of this terrible power, and all the other inhabitants are at the mercy of prowling kidnappers, because there are mult.i.tudes of white as well as black slaves on Southern plantations, and slavery is no longer fastidious with regard to the color of its prey.

As soon as that appalling decision of the Supreme Court was enunciated, in the name of the Const.i.tution, the people of the North should have risen _en ma.s.se_, if for no other cause, and declared the Union at an end; and they would have done so, if they had not lost their manhood, and their reverence for justice and liberty.

In the 4th Sect. of Art. IV., the United States guarantee to protect every State in the Union "_against domestic violence_." By the 8th Section of Article 1., congress is empowered "to provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, _suppress insurrections_, and repel invasions." These provisions, however strictly they may apply to cases of disturbance among the white population, were adopted with special reference to the slave population, for the purpose of keeping them in their chains by the combined military force of the country; and were these repealed, and the South left to manage her slaves as best she could, a servile insurrection would ere long be the consequence, as general as it would unquestionably be successful. Says Mr. Madison, respecting these clauses:--

"On application of the legislature or executive, as the case may be, the militia of the other States are to be called to suppress domestic insurrections. Does this bar the States from calling forth their own militia? No; but it gives them a _supplementary_ security to suppress insurrections and domestic violence."

The answer to Patrick Henry's objection, as urged against the const.i.tution in the Virginia convention, that there was no power left to the States to quell an insurrection of slaves, as it was wholly vested in congress, George Nicholas asked:--